Posted on

There are too few senior women leaders, but the tide is turning

You were Browne Jacobson’s first female partner and were recently elected its first female senior partner. How have the attitudes towards women in law, and women leaders, changed during your career?

There is no doubt that attitudes towards women in law have changed dramatically since I qualified as a solicitor in 1984. As part of our celebration of 100 Years of Women in Law, one of our solicitors posted an extract from the 1973 edition of Glanville Williams’Learning the Law – a publication on my university reading list. Mr Williams opined that, ‘practise at the Bar is a demanding task for a man; it is even more difficult for a woman’, that ‘an advocate’s task is essentially combative, whereas women are not generally prepared to give battle unless they are annoyed. A woman’s voice, also, does not carry as well as a man’s’, and that, ‘notwithstanding these disadvantages, some women succeed’.

Apart from taking our collective breath away at Browne Jacobson, it does make you realise how far the profession has come. The days when I attended Law Society events as the lone woman amongst 50 men have long since gone and there is much more gender diversity. Of course, much remains to be done as there are still too few women in senior leadership positions, but the tide does seem to be changing in that regard.

With that in mind, how would you define Browne Jacobson’s culture?

Our clients say that we are approachable, pragmatic, down to earth, and clear. We expect to treat our people in the same way, whilst operating on an ethical and inclusive basis with a renewed focus on corporate sustainability.

What are the biggest challenges facing the UK’s legal sector?

There is a long list! In the short term, Brexit; in the medium term, the economy; and in the longer term, the lack of diversity in the broadest possible sense. Researchers at Harvard talk about the benefits of ‘acquired diversity’or diversity acquired from experience. If law firms are to succeed in the future, they need to embrace both diversity and acquired diversity.

What are your firm’s policies on diversity and inclusion, and wellbeing?

Rather than having policies, we believe that it is important to embed diversity and inclusion (D&I) and wellbeing in everything we do. In terms of D&I, we are working hard to create an environment where everyone can thrive and succeed. D&I is constantly evolving so it is important to create a space where everyone can learn and share information.

We are currently celebrating LGBT+ History Month and everyone is encouraged to get involved through Yammer, posting contributions and suggestions, as well as promoting events in our offices such as baking rainbow treats!

“For me, innovation isn’t just about having the latest gadget or software, but about genuinely thinking differently and not just accepting tried and trusted ways of doing things”

We have a range of wellbeing initiatives, all proposed by our people, from plants in our office areas, yoga, and circuit training, to talks on topics such as the menopause and the menopause for men.

We’ve seen several high-profile ‘MeToo’stories hit the legal sector over the last few years. How can firms better guard their staff from the unacceptable behaviours we’ve read about?

Firstly, I think firms need to set standards of behaviour and make it clear that everyone is expected to adhere to those standards. However, it is equally important for firms to let their people know that if the line is crossed, there is a safe space where they can ‘call out’inappropriate behaviour.

What do you think are the top things most clients want and why? Have these changed over time?

I don’t think that our clients’key requirements have changed over the years. Clients have always wanted speedy, good quality, and cost-effective advice. What has made a difference is improved technology which has increased expectations in all three areas.

What does innovation mean to you and how can law firms be better at it?

For me, innovation isn’t just about having the latest gadget or software, but about genuinely thinking differently and not just accepting tried and trusted ways of doing things. The difficulty is that many senior leaders have not grown up with technology or the different approach to learning that brings. Firms need to find a way to involve people outside that senior leadership group to provide diversity of thought and approach.

What’s the biggest change or innovation made in the firm that will benefit clients?

As we are about to launch our new strategy I don’t want to give away any trade secrets…

You lead the firm’s retail and logistics sector group jointly with Sarah Parkinson. What key trends have you noticed of late?

For some time now, there has been talk of the ‘death of the High Street’. I don’t think the High Street is dying, but consumers are now spoilt for choice and are shopping differently. Brands that haven’t been quick to embrace change are failing. Today’s shoppers are also much more socially aware and sustainability has become a serious concern. However, it will become increasingly difficult to reconcile sustainability with convenience.

What have you found is the best way to retain talent – both at partner and associate levels?

I think there are two elements to this. First, you need to recruit people who are passionate about the firm. People who care about the firm are far more likely to stay with you and will want to ensure that the firm and its people succeed. Second, it is important that people at every level feel valued. Feeling valued is a very individual thing, but if you are able to give people a choice of options, they have more control over their career.

This March we celebrate International Women’s Day. What advice would you give to the next generation of women partners and law firm leaders?

I see so many potential women leaders who talk about their lack of confidence that I would give the same advice I gave to my 11-year-old niece recently – to be brave and to believe in yourself. I firmly believe that law firms of the future will have to create an entirely different working environment. As women have, by and large, been unable to shape the current environment, they are likely to view things differently and are therefore uniquely placed to make the necessary changes – along with their male colleagues.

Finally, what’s surprised you most about being senior partner?

I guess I’m surprised, but also delighted, that our people feel that they can contact me directly with their ideas around diversity and inclusion, corporate sustainability, and innovation, or about issues that concern them. When I look back to the start of my career, the senior partner was a distant figure and I would certainly never have spoken to him unless he spoke to me first! The position is now very different and we need to be prepared to listen.

Posted on

Pitch parity: Transforming gender diversity in client pitch activity

Although Weil has had a longstanding commitment to promoting and supporting its talented female attorneys through its ‘Women@Weil’programme and other initiatives, the firm, like most in Big Law, knew it had to do more. As part of this effort, Weil’s management committee formed a Taskforce on Women’s Engagement & Retention (TOWER) in 2014, and the firm has seen notable results.

‘We were successful in recruiting and often retaining women associates, but in terms of looking ahead at promotion and ultimately future firm leadership, we wanted to undertake more concrete steps to uncover the issues at play and then find ways to address them,’explains Moore.

TOWER, which is composed of partners and other senior firm business executives, oversees all women’s initiatives globally within Weil, with a particular focus on female advancement and leadership. Moore points out that ‘40% of its members are male because promoting and advancing female attorneys is a firm priority and not just a women’s priority’. TOWER was initially tasked with finding out what was influencing successful women to leave the firm, as well as what was frustrating female attorneys in their intended career paths.

The focus on pitch activity

‘It was once true that if you were a great lawyer you could become a partner and that was all that mattered, but the business case now requires showing the ability to retain or procure new clients,’explains Lennon. ‘It requires an element of business development and acumen. In terms of access to the most significant client relationships for the firm, if you are not presented with those opportunities, there is really no chance of advancement. That is why it is so critical that women and other diverse lawyers are given this access. Law firms are businesses and being able to show client generation is key.’

Lennon’s statements are in response to the question as to why Weil is placing specific emphasis on pitch activity as part of its endeavours to advance and retain female lawyers. As part of its research, TOWER canvassed a wide range of female lawyers within the firm, reviewed exit interviews, and drew on external market data. Overall, what the taskforce found was that access to business development was noted by female lawyers as a key area in which improvements could be made to aid their success – hence Weil’s focus on gender diversity in client pitching.

‘The inclusion and participation in client development and business generation is a crucial factor determining compensation, advancement, and selection for key management positions at all top firms,’adds Moore. ‘Pitching is one element of that business development and client development effort. Plus, pitches are quantifiable and measure progress, so we can assess where we are making changes in that area.’

The obvious next question is what the firm is doing to address this. Is it simply a matter of adding women to pitch teams to balance them out, or is there a more developed thought process behind what is being done at Weil?

The starting point for the firm was to measure existing involvement in pitching to set a baseline. Weil also completed research into client team dynamics to ensure it had the knowledge needed to create future pitch teams that would be the most successful.

Following this, the firm addressed the need for ‘a broader education about the importance of diversity in pitch teams,’says Moore. This was largely accomplished through a one-on-one series of discussions to raise visibility among male – and female – partners about some of the female partners in other practice groups, departments, and offices that could potentially add value to their pitch teams.

“It was once true that if you were a great lawyer you could become a partner and that was all that mattered, but the business case now requires showing the ability to retain or procure new clients”

‘It has been an internal education process,’adds Lennon. ‘If the default was for a male partner or a non-diverse partner to pitch with people they were familiar with – with no malicious intent, but simply because they knew the person’s style or had a familiarity with their approach – we wanted to highlight other partners who could bring the same expertise and who had done really well pitching to other clients.’Lennon does not downplay the time and effort this took. ‘It required a lot of those types of discussions on a daily basis, as well as Meredith and I presenting in practice group and department lunches about these efforts and recounting some of the successes so that people understood what was going on and realised that they should be a part of it.’

Moore and Lennon spearhead the efforts as the leaders of the diversity and business development teams respectively, and collaboration between teams and professionals within the firm is a key component. Moore highlights the involvement of the business development team as a key component of their success: ‘It has been a critical element to our diversity strategy that business development has a seat at the table. Our business development team provides so much insight into what clients are thinking and into how we can ensure our diverse attorneys are getting the visibility they need to be seen as thought leaders and the next generation of leaders at the firm.’

Results to date

‘We are really proud and think it has been a terrific success,’says Lennon. Weil measures the related outcomes against the baselines set in 2014 – before TOWER and Weil’s ramped-up focus on advancing women within the firm.

Moore outlines the impressive results they have seen to date: ‘We have increased participation in client pitches by female partners by 69.4%. Pitches led by female partners increased from 12.8% to 20% of all new pitches. In terms of really looking at success, the retention as counsel increased from 17% to 27.2% in new pitch opportunities involving female partners. We were also retained as counsel in 30.6% of female-led pitch opportunities, which was an increase from 18.2%.’

Snapshot: Measuring success

  • Overall change in female participation in client pitches by 69.4%
  • Increase in pitches led by female partners 12.8% 20%
  • Increase in retention rate in new pitch opportunities involving female partners 17% 27.2%
  • Increase in retention rate in female-led pitch opportunities 18.2% 30.6%

And while clients may not be overtly aware of Weil’s exact strategy to include women in pitch activity, they have taken note and have commented on the impressive diversity of Weil’s teams. ‘This is an initiative that has, largely, been invisible to our clients until now,’confirms Moore, ‘but we have had countless examples of feedback from individual pitch teams and also, really importantly, from the resulting client service teams because of the diversity of those teams.’

Significantly, the inclusion of more women in pitch teams is having a meaningful knock-on effect on the resulting teams actually completing the client work. ‘This isn’t about tokenism, there is a critical mass of diversity on most of the pitch teams as well as the resulting client teams,’explains Moore. ‘And that is what we have had client feedback about – the quality and quantity of women, and also the broader diversity, on these teams – as it is very noticeable to both male and female clients compared to what they see from some other firms.’

‘Anyone who is participating in a pitch is adding substantively to that pitch,’states Lennon. ‘They are not just there to showcase that we have diversity in our partnership, they are substantially participating.’

It may be difficult for Weil to directly attribute female retention and promotion rates to its focus on client acquisition and development via pitch activity, but Moore and Lennon point out that the number of women who stay at Weil and advance to leadership positions has been increasing. Moore notes specifically that ‘45% of new partner promotions have been women’in recent years’.

“It has been a critical element to our diversity strategy that business development has a seat at the table”

‘Looking at the longer term trajectory,’she says, ‘we are not just looking at helping to advance a few of our women partners, but advancing the vast majority of our women partners in terms of helping them build their business and build their brands both internally and externally.’

Wider efforts

Moore and her team keep intersectionality in mind in their pitching and wider diversity efforts with a view to ensuring that successful programmes for one group can be offered for others if appropriate. ‘We have been particularly focused on women of colour, and are also looking at the intersection of LGBTQ individuals and women. These are things we are looking at in terms of our pitches and also all of our other efforts.’

‘We have held bi-annual women of colour breakfasts, we have had a series over the last two years where we have looked at intersectional clients, and we also hosted a client event for the “Harriet” movie screening with our black affinity group and our women affinity group. Our most recent pilot with associates included 50% women of colour so we are looking at ways in which we can move the needle within our diversity of women and diversity within each of our affinity groups.’

The emphasis on gender diversity in pitching feeds into the broader focus on women within the firm. With TOWER overseeing all women’s initiatives within Weil, it has piloted and developed numerous programmes directed at the female associate and partner populations of the firm. This has included piloting a number of leadership development programmes.

‘One is a programme that included executive coaching and opportunities to connect women across offices and departments,’says Moore. ‘We have also piloted a programme among senior associates from which we have now had 100% promotions from the participants within that group. We will be broadening that out to a larger group of women as well as other diverse associates and counsel who are partners of the future.’

‘An outcome of that was seeing the power of executive coaching and we wanted to make that more readily available, and also cover a broader array of issues such as career management, business development, and people management. We started offering on-demand coaching – six hours of training that is available to all of our associates each year – which we have had an incredible response to.’

‘We also have mentoring circles with one male and one female partner with a group of five to six associates. About a third of these are women associates only. They have been just as important for peer mentoring as for partners mentoring associates, as well as in ensuring our leaders understand the particular issues facing women within the firm.’

“We don’t just do programmes and events and hope that it works, we measure it to see if it works and, if it doesn’t, we look at how we can retool it to make it more effective in the future”

And again the strategy towards promoting female success links back to business development, as illustrated when Moore notes some additional efforts her team is leading: ‘We have, with business development, already held two Women@Weil partner and client retreats, with another one planned for this year. We have focused a lot on business development through events, both in terms of women connecting with other women, but also recognising that our women partners probably have more male clients than female clients and that it is helpful for us to find ways for them to connect. We are also enabling our male partners who have female clients to connect them to our female partners and associates.’

‘We have worked very hard to showcase our women leaders through media, awards, panel discussions and other external efforts, in addition to pitches. For example, more than one-third of our firm awards and accolades were received by women last year, and 45% of all of our award nominations in 2019 were for women lawyers. We have had a series of different panels and programmes to highlight the amazing women leaders across the firm to show all the different paths to the top and really allow women who are starting off their careers to learn from their experiences and backgrounds.’

Competitive advantage

The focus on developing and promoting women within the firm has helped Weil with recruiting female talent at all levels. As Moore confirms, ‘it helps in terms of recruiting in law schools, and we are also looking at how we are recruiting at the lateral associate and lateral partner levels. Many of our gains for women partners are happening simultaneously through lateral promotion as well as through internal promotion, which is important if we want to move the number in terms of women in the partnership.’

The unique approach to pitching is an area in which Moore and Lennon believe Weil stands out from its competitors. ‘Obviously every firm knows that diversity is important. It is important to clients who are being vocal about it, which is great. We took a disciplined and structured approach with metrics earlier than other firms. We can really tell at a client level, at an office level, and at every level of management how many people who are pitching are diverse. So, I think that is really the key differentiator,’ says Lennon.

Moore adds: ‘I think the emphasis on pitch teams and the resulting client teams, as well as looking at opportunities for women partners to engage with male clients, is something that is unique at our law firm. Tying our results to numbers has also really mattered. We don’t just do programmes and events and hope that it works, we measure it to see if it works and, if it doesn’t, we look at how we can retool it to make it more effective in the future. And if it does work, we look to see how we can broaden those successful efforts so we can impact more people within the firm.’

And Weil is looking to push their efforts further in recognition of the fact that standing out on this issue in comparison to their fellow law firms or current market numbers for female partnership is still not enough. ‘While I believe Weil is leading the market, using other law firms as a benchmark is a pretty low bar,’Moore says. Instead the firm aims to match female representation in law school graduating classes. ‘What we are trying to do is ensure our proportion of women over time by measuring throughout the entire pipeline from entry point to the top. Increasing from 20% to 28% female partners in about five years is a pretty notable increase, but we are aiming for 47% which is what is coming out of law schools. That is the number we should be aiming for at all levels.’

Posted on

Business priorities, challenges, and the many sucesses in in-house practice

To start us off, can you please tell me about the role you held at WellCare when you were included in the 2019 US GC Powerlist?

I was general counsel and board secretary. Basically, I was the senior executive in charge of the WellCare legal department which handled all legal affairs for the company and all strategic counselling for the CEO. We worked very closely with the business to advise on all legal-related matters. My role as secretary of the board of directors was to advise on all legal matters related to the board.

You have just recently moved to pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly. What attracted you to the company?

I am grateful for the opportunity to serve as general counsel for an iconic company such as Eli Lilly. Not only is Lilly known for its innovation and life-saving drugs, it is also notable for its corporate culture. Having worked in-house at two other companies, including as general counsel at one, I have come to understand the importance of culture to a company’s success. I can’t think of a better place to be at this point in my career.

Having spent a number of years in private practice at two different law firms, why did you decide to move in-house?

I was a commercial litigator at Latham & Watkins for five years and then I was a patent litigator at Foley & Lardner for 12 years (including five as an equity partner). So, I had a total of 17 years in private practice. After 17 years, I grew more interested in being involved in a company’s overall business as opposed to providing pure legal advice. That’s when I looked into going in-house. You don’t really know what it is like working in-house until you make the jump. But it was fascinating to me to understand the various aspects of business considerations – the operational, financial, all the way through to public relations – and you don’t get to see that when you are outside counsel.

I applied for a job in-house and was hired by Abbott Laboratories in 2010 as the head of global patent litigation and then moved into the role of head of commercial litigation. In 2016, I became general counsel and board secretary at WellCare. Since moving in-house in 2010, I have found my place, which I feel is best suited to me, and it’s where I am happiest.

So, is understanding all aspects of the business what you see as the biggest difference between working in-house and in private practice?

Yes, and the reason that is so interesting to me is that you take multiple factors into account when you are making legal decisions [in-house], so you are not giving legal advice without a pretty robust context. You are informed by the business priorities and operational realities, financial realities, reputational issues… and I like being able to take all of that and combine it with the legal advice to come up with the best practical advice and solution for the company.

“Since moving in-house in 2010, I have found my place, which I feel is best suited to me, and it’s where I am happiest”

In a law firm, for the most part, while you get a bit of insight into those factors, you don’t get anywhere near what you do in-house. I also love the fast pace in-house and the need to make judgement calls with limited information.

Your entry in the GC Powerlist specifically mentions changes you made to your legal team when at WellCare. Can you please expand a bit on that?

When I joined WellCare in 2016 all of the lawyers were based at headquarters in Tampa, Florida. But WellCare’s business was in all 50 US states, and most heavily involved in about 20 of those. We didn’t have any lawyers out in the field, so to speak. Working with my senior legal leadership team of Tammy Meyer, Mike Haber, and Kevin Behan, we conducted a thorough talent review, realigned talent, and upgraded it in some cases, to focus on the business’priorities.

We restructured the department and decentralised it. More than half of our attorneys were placed out in the various markets, and that way they had direct interaction with the business, and it gave us the opportunity to provide better service. For example, our attorneys could then regularly attend business meetings in the various markets to better understand business strategy and financial realities. That allowed us to give much better legal advice.

We also pushed attorneys out into the markets to give them more opportunities for professional growth. They were able to do a more sophisticated level of legal advising than they would sitting in an office hundreds of miles away and not being as close to the business. That was another very significant change we made to improve the level of service we provide.

We also implemented legal career training for attorneys, paraprofessionals, and administrative staff. Business and hard skills training were obviously involved, but it also included a lot of soft skills training to give people the opportunity to hone their skills and give them the chance to develop and grow within the organisation and, if they wanted to, seek opportunities within the broader business. I hired an independent consultant to hold individual sessions with every member of the team (not just attorneys), and we also did exercises as a team focused on how we work as a group. This improved our ability to interact with each other, helped us understand better how we function as a team, and built a great deal of trust within the department.

So, not a small amount of work then!

No! One of the most challenging parts was that while we were making all of these changes we also had to change the culture. We moved to a much more proactive culture and a much more business-oriented and highly responsive culture. We didn’t really have that in place when I joined. Implementing the culture change was challenging, but we recognised early on that it was the most important thing we could do. If you get the culture right then you can hire for the culture, and then people who come here buy into it, and we are all then growing in the same direction.

I think the thing I am most pleased about is that we accomplished what we set out to do, and we really did change the culture – and not just because we hired for it, but also because many of the people in the legal department who were already at WellCare when I joined were open-minded about changing it, and they understood that it would make us better.

The CEO of WellCare, Ken Burdick, was supportive from day one. One of the greatest things from him was that he gave me the freedom, and he demonstrated confidence and trust in me, to implement the transformation. He provided a lot of feedback, but as a true leader he did not micro-manage, and he supported these efforts. This was also true with respect to the board of directors and especially its chairman, Chris Michalik.

“Implementing the culture change was challenging, but we recognised early on that it was the most important thing we could do”

You also changed your outside counsel panel at WellCare. What did that entail? And what do you look for in outside counsel?

When I joined, the selection of outside counsel did not have a governing process, and there were no organised and established panels to handle legal work. We had more than 50 outside counsel representing us across various matters, so we set out to understand what each firm/attorney did, and we found that there were a lot of inefficiencies, overlap, and differences in quality. And no one was keeping track or making decisions based on the quality or cost. We put in place a process to whittle down our outside counsel and to establish preferred panels, and we went from more than 50 to under 20 law firms.

That was a huge accomplishment, and we kept the best firms and asked them to be more invested in us and in our business. In return, we gave them more opportunities to work with us and to expand. In terms of what I look for in outside counsel, and this goes hand-in-hand with who we chose for the panel, they must go beyond just pure legal advice. They need to understand the business goals, and they need to be very practical. I don’t want ten-page memos. I have a lot of deep dive conversations with them (and sometimes long memos are necessary), but as far as advice goes, I want practical advice once we have discussed the implications and the various pressures. The firms that we ultimately chose at WellCare were the ones that put the time in and invested in us to show that they were a long-term partner, and they presented their advice in that required context.

Your legal team at WellCare won the ‘Legal Department of the Year’in the 2019 Florida Legal Awards. What do you attribute that to?

We handled seven acquisitions in three years, so that was a significant part of our work, but just as much as that I would point to the tremendous amount of regulatory work we completed as the WellCare business was expanding its Medicare footprint and also growing its Medicaid business in multiple states. Over the past two years, that expansion involved a large amount of regulatory licensing work and responding to requests for proposals (RFPs). With respect to RFPs, those require a lot of support, guidance, and strategy when you are responding to them, not to mention when the winners of those RFPs are announced, and the protests (essentially litigation) ensue.

The last bucket I would say is litigation. When I came in there were many pending litigation matters, mainly with providers such as doctors and hospitals, and with some vendors, but there was not a process in place within the legal department for how to efficiently resolve those. Some cases lingered for years – which was not a positive. So we reviewed all litigation matters, and we basically won or favourably settled all litigation, which not only reduced outside legal spend but also reduced the risks to the company.

Personal congratulations are in order for your recent award being named The American Lawyer 2019 GC of the Year. Any comments on that and, on a related note, what do you see as your greatest professional achievement to date?

As to the award, I am thrilled and humbled. It is an honour, and I feel so lucky that I have found – going in-house – a place where what I do does not feel like work. I am using skills that I enjoy and that come naturally to me, and that happen to also make me successful in this job. First, at Abbott Laboratories, and then at WellCare, the people who hired me gave me my chance, which is all you can ask for, and I took it from there.

While I’m excited about being named GC of the Year, the ‘Florida legal department of the year’award you asked about earlier is very important to me because it recognises the work the legal department did as a team. I focus a lot on recognising people. A pay cheque is great, but when people go above and beyond you have to make sure to recognise them. To be recognised as the Florida legal department of the year with the team we built at WellCare was incredible. It was great for everyone because they worked so hard to get to that point.

Is there anything else you would like to note about your team or work?

I have mentioned it already, but I would like to note again that my senior legal leadership team and I spent a lot of time on individual and team development within the department at WellCare. I mentioned the independent consultant we retained, and I think we did some really neat things. Each individual in the department had a written development plan, and we asked them to think about what their ultimate career goal was, so we could work with them to gain the experience and knowledge they needed to get there.

“I am a big believer in hiring for merit and for culture. I think people who perform well are often those who have had to overcome hurdles and can think outside the box”

The consultant came in multiple times and sat down with each attorney individually doing assessments of skills and behavioural assessments, including how we each behave when under pressure and how to best interact with each other under pressure. We did multiple group exercises with sub-groups within the department, including attorneys, paraprofessionals, and staff, and then with the entire department together. The fact that we invested in this level of individual and team development, and that we included every single person within the department, sent a strong message to everyone that we are investing and invested in their success.

That, in turn, created a level of trust and honesty which fed into the transparent and strong culture we built. Once it was announced in 2019 that WellCare was being acquired by Centene there was stress and uncertainty at first, as you would expect, but all that work we had already done on individual development and working together as a team bore fruit as far as how the legal department weathered this period of uncertainty, and we came out with people really excited about the future. So, I am really proud that we did that, and I think it was one of our greatest accomplishments.

I would also like to mention that we had one of the most diverse departments I have ever seen and that we made some great hires. I am a big believer in hiring for merit and for culture. I think people who perform well are often those who have had to overcome hurdles and can think outside the box. That often means they are not just going to do something because everyone else has always done it that way. I am very proud of the team we built.

Does diversity affect the outside counsel you work with and how you select them?

I think I always have an eye on diversity. Just like with the in-house team I want to hire the best. What I want is for the firms to put forward their best teams, with an eye toward diversity. The law firms I have worked with have done a great job doing that, and I have not had to put pressure on outside counsel, nor have I had to have a discussion with them about presenting more diverse teams, because our outside counsel are presenting us with teams that are diverse in many ways, including diversity of experience.

As a final question, is there any advice you would give to someone looking to make the move from private practice to an in-house role?

Yes, if you are at a law firm, I would say spend as much time as you can with your clients. Go to their headquarters. Offer to be seconded to their company for a few months. Try to get into the meetings with business units when they meet with the legal department. Just spend as much time as you can learning how things work in-house because this will give you the best sense of what it’s like to be a lawyer there versus at a law firm.

Posted on

How will you come back to work after children?

The fact that two women made partner of a large international firm when they had young children (while on maternity leave in fact) shouldn’t be news. But it is. If two men made partner while having young children it wouldn’t be news worthy and it happens all time.

Stephanie Lambert and Jo Garland at HFW Australia share what it took for them to make partner while having young children and being on maternity leave, and how firms can be more encouraging of parental leave and overcoming presentism, so that making partner as a woman with young children is no longer news but the norm.

As lawyers there’s a general expectation that you should aspire to the lofty heights of partnership from the time that you first enter law. While it might be the case that such aspirations do, in fact, exist, there are slim pickings when it comes to identifying female partners that exemplify such aspirations.

According to the Law Society of NSW’s annual ‘National Profile of the Profession’, published July 2019, there are now more female than male lawyers across Australia and the number of women practising law in Australia has increased by 49% since 2011, compared to only 16% growth for men. However, the Australian Financial Review’s 2019 ‘Law Partnership Survey’found that only 27% of partners in large and medium-sized firms are women. Looking at equity partnership, the same survey finds that figure further decreases to 21.4% at Australia’s 44 leading law firms.

Despite these low figures we both aspired to make partner, and succeeded, at what is a very challenging time while juggling maternity leave, babies, and work. We came to confirm our aspirations to make partner in different ways. For me (Jo) it was deciding that partnership was something I really wanted and that, despite the sacrifices I’d have to make, in the long run, it was the right decision for my family (husband Hamish, 4-year-old Willa, and 4-month-old Ruby).

“The bias materialises in different ways, such as the financial modelling for a firm where prioritising billable hours or quantitative measures can impact on progress to partnership”

For me (Stephanie), having established my career progressively, it was the determination that partnership was the next step in a natural progression for me (despite my being pregnant at the time of submitting my partnership application and despite having been asked by a number of somewhat perplexed individuals, ‘how will you come back to work after having a child?’).

Although the profession has come a long way in addressing this type of bias, and recognising that having a family is not prohibitive to partnership or other senior positions within a law firm, these type of questions highlight that such bias still exists. The bias also materialises in different ways, such as the financial modelling for a firm where prioritising billable hours or quantitative measures can impact on progress to partnership where a desire to start a family, or family commitments, intervene.

While there are myriad factors which allow these stereotypes to continue, ultimately it comes down to the culture of the firm and whether it can overcome the traditional expectations of presenteeism and genuinely encourage parental leave (for both men and women), flexible working arrangements, and variables in financial modelling.

The practice of law is really a lifestyle – you need to be flexible with your personal and professional life and take the good with the bad – and this needs to be reflected in the greater culture of the firm. For those looking to make partner and have a family at the same time, there’s a lot that you can do to set yourself up and establish your position in the firm beforehand.

For example, having a strong internal profile is something that can really advantage you as you’ll find that people outside of your immediate group will be more inclined to support your career progression to partnership when they know who you are and what you do rather than just a name on the page (which can often happen in big firms). Staying in touch with the firm and your clients while on parental leave also helps; for example, attending firm functions and team meetings, or having a coffee catch up with a client. These are things we both did. It allows you to stay connected with the firm while still maintaining the time you need with your new family.

It also helps greatly to have a life partner that is prepared to take an equal role in parenting and child care. For me (Jo), it would have been far more difficult to return to work (particularly with a 4-month-old baby) if my husband hadn’t taken some time out of work to be the primary caregiver. For me (Stephanie), it was a combination of my husband taking time out from his work and the support of (very valued) hired help. You also have to learn to let go on the home front and accept that things can’t always be perfect. If your kids are served pasta three weeknights in a row, or consecutively eating at your husband’s shwarma shop, you accept it and make up for it on the weekend!

Society needs to become more accepting and promote equal rights for men and women to take time out of work and spend time with their children. When men and women across the board are taking parental leave, and taking time out for child-related commitments, then it becomes less of a gender issue and some of the bias around women’s commitment to work/partnership post children may fade away over time.

To wrap up, having a young family while being a partner is not easy. It’s not easy regardless of gender, although women tend to suffer the career setbacks as the primary caregiver. Flexible work for all genders, a change in the billable hours value system and accepting that you have to take the good with the bad in a partner role (and letting your kids eat pasta three days in a row) all take us one step closer to proper gender equality at partner level.

Posted on

Arbitration and Asia – opportunities and challenges

Asia and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) feature large in the arbitration scene, especially in the construction and energy fields where infrastructure projects capture headlines on a regular basis.

However, one pauses to consider what the BRI is really all about. The popular view of the BRI is large infrastructure projects funded by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), utilising Chinese equipment and Chinese manpower. However, when one looks a little more closely on the ground, the reach of the BRI is in fact much wider, including in types of projects and manner of involvement. It may come as a surprise to some that BRI projects encompass all manner of diverse developments from tourist resorts to high-speed railways.

In terms of involvement, the participation of PRC contractors is prevalent in many domestic economies; Malaysia, as an example, has seen a large number of domestic private sector developments built by PRC contractors. Often these PRC contractors are not the main contractor but are nevertheless a significant part of the engine room that constructs the project, acting as ‘main’sub-contractors to the local main contractor and as suppliers of equipment installed in the developments as well as construction equipment. This is not to mention the extensive use of ‘Made in China’products in every activity.

“Any ambiguity in the arbitration clause would result in uncertainty, possibly fuelling cross border court actions as to what parties meant by the clause parties had apparently ‘agreed’!”

These projects and involvement being contractual in nature, are often entered into between locally incorporated entities. Where there are Investee States involved, it is common operating procedure for them to nominate a local government agency as the contracting party, or even a locally incorporated company owned or controlled by the government agency. In turn, the PRC party will usually operate as a locally incorporated subsidiary. Joint ventures are also often between locally incorporated entities.

Being in essence domestic contracts, there is a tendency for such construction main/sub/supply contracts and joint venture agreements to apply the local governing law and to include ‘standard’arbitration clauses which refer to local statutes and local arbitral institutions. Such a scenario results in the rise of domestic arbitrations, applying local law, between locally incorporated entities. There is a substantial body of such type of domestic disputes which may have escaped widespread public attention.

Taking cognisance of this, counsel and parties would do well to pay close attention to dispute resolution clauses, especially in such ‘domestic’contracts. The moniker of ‘midnight clause’is not without reason and often the drafter is not a seasoned disputes practitioner. Experience shows us that parties may make concessions on arbitration provisions in order to protect headline commercial terms, which may well be a costly choice if a time comes for dispute resolution and cross border enforcement.

The divide between international and domestic arbitration regimes in various jurisdictions also give rise to the need for parties to consider in greater depth the reference to arbitration legislation, which may have opt-in, opt-out provisions depending on whether it is an international or domestic arbitration, and which has significant consequences on how the law of the seat is applied and court intervention on questions of law, interim measures, and enforcement of awards.

Rules of arbitral institutions may in the large part be quite similar, with many adopting the UNCITRAL model. However, the variance may be greater on how institutional rules deal with matters such as consolidation, emergency arbitrators, interim measures, and fast track arbitrations. These are the sort of matters which parties may not consider deserving of attention in the headiness of securing a contract, but would hit them at the crucial moment when they need to rely on them.

The venue may be different from the seat, and if not yet considered, ought to be. Costs are a major consideration in arbitration proceedings, as are aligning the diaries of numerous counsel, witnesses of fact, expert witnesses and tribunal members. The fewer long-haul flights needed to convene physical hearings, the greater the ability to expedite proceedings and save costs. Some jurisdictions have strict work permit requirements, limited flight connectivity or expensive accommodation, all of which may impact the ease and cost of convening physical hearings.

Any ambiguity in the arbitration clause would result in uncertainty, possibly fuelling cross border court actions as to what parties meant by the clause parties had apparently ‘agreed’!

All this said, there is much to be commended in giving serious thought to what BRI arbitrations really look like beyond the popular headlines.

Posted on

The firms standing strong in Deutschland

The new 2020 Deutschland guide, available since January, marks the seventh edition since we launched our German language guide. The substantial growth and refinement of our guide is evident in the numbers: while our very first 2014 guide contained 12 practice areas and 43 ranking tables, we currently list 21 practice areas and no less than 73 ranking tables.

Although there are now more rankings to be conquered, we continue to focus on the elite within the law firm market. The 2020 rankings feature a total of 393 firms (compared to 350 in our 2014 edition), we recommend 2,802 lawyers in our commentary, and 580 lawyers are listed across our leading lawyers, next generation lawyers, and rising stars tables. Congratulations to each and every firm and all lawyers that have been included in the new guide, but well done especially to those who have entered the rankings for the very first time.

Looking at this year’s rankings data, some firms are continuing to stand particularly strong in the German market: Top of the pack with the most rankings in the new guide are CMS (50), Hogan Lovells (45), Noerr (42), Taylor Wessing (38) and Hengeler Mueller (37). CMS also again achieved the most recommended lawyer mentions (82), while Hengeler Mueller took over from Freshfields with the most top tier rankings (19).

Notably, the usual suspects are joined by Luther – the full-service German firm with eight offices abroad – now holding fifth place among the top firms with the most lawyer mentions this year (60).

“Firms ranked in our Deutschland guide also immediately benefit from reaching a larger international English speaking audience through our EMEA guide”

Hogan Lovells and Linklaters are clearly prepared for the next inevitable generational shift with the most next generation lawyers listed in our tables (nine and eight respectively). Noerr deserves a special shout-out for straight away achieving the highest number of rising stars (six) in this brand new category. Overall, Freshfields remains in the lead with the most lawyers listed across our three leading individuals tables (31).

A third category to our leading individuals tables to recognise the younger talent was not the only change in our 2020 guide. We have a brand new website (www.legal500.de/)! Alongside the enhanced functionality and user-friendly design, the new site also contains an improved and expanded editorial format with more emphasis on client testimonials and more information on key clients and highlight matters. We are therefore now able to showcase firms’strengths in much more detail.

Firms ranked in our Deutschland guide also immediately benefit from reaching a larger international English-speaking audience through our EMEA guide. Every year our German-language coverage of Germany is translated and all editorial and all rankings are transferred to our EMEA edition, which publishes in April.

Preparing for 2021

So, with no need to submit for EMEA separately, what’s next? Time to prepare for the 2021 guide, of course. As every year, we are looking to make some changes to reflect current market developments and demands. While we added Real Estate Finance, Foreign Trade Law, and Commercial Administrative Law as new categories for 2020, 2021 will see a novel table for Consumer Goods and Food Law, and the Real Estate rankings will get a makeover with a separate table for Project Development. In addition, a new regional section for Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland should open the doors to our rankings for some firms in the west of the country.

A couple of years ago we started highlighting the top five firms advising in the Fintech segment as part of our Banking Regulatory ranking. Now this hot topic deserves a broader and more comprehensive mention by means of its own ranking, which will for the first time be featured under the Banking and Finance section in the next guide.

Last year we renamed our Maritime and Shipping table to reflect a broader range of advice to the maritime sector, and this year we will do the same for our Transport Law ranking, which will now encompass all Advice to the Transport Sector. Similarly, our Outsourcing ranking will look more broadly at IT Transactions and Outsourcing and our Non-profit ranking will expand to Private Clients and Non-Profits.

To submit for our upcoming research, please visit our website. There you will find a list of all practice areas featured in the upcoming guide, our submission deadline and our submission form for you to download, fill out, and send via our Submissions Site. If you have any queries regarding the new guidelines or upcoming research, then please get in touch. Best of luck and here’s to raising the bar in 2021!

Posted on

Leading the pack across Asia Pacific

Congratulations to all the law firms and individuals who feature in the new Asia Pacific rankings, and especially to those who appear for the first time.

Our 2020 guide recognises 687 law firms across 25 jurisdictions. The highest concentration of ranked firms is in China with 147 recommended. India (128), Hong Kong (90), Singapore (88), Malaysia (77), Australia (63), Philippines (52), Indonesia (50), New Zealand (43) and South Korea (43) complete the top ten largest jurisdictions by number of ranked firms. But which firms secured the most practice and lawyer rankings in 2020 and, by extension, the ultimate bragging rights?

Well, once again, congratulations are due to multinational firm Baker McKenzie, which came out on top with a total of 150 practice rankings across the whole of Asia Pacific. Following some way behind, the chasing pack contain almost exclusively international firms: DLA Piper (85); Herbert Smith Freehills (84); Norton Rose Fulbright (74); King & Wood Mallesons (68); Allen & Overy (67); Clifford Chance (62); Rajah & Tann (58); Dentons (57); and Ashurst (54).

Looking solely at the results of Tier 1 practices, Baker McKenzie once again leads the way with 82 top tier teams. Anglo-Australian Herbert Smith Freehills and Hong Kong-headquartered King & Wood Mallesons each have 43 Tier 1 rankings, some way ahead of the Magic Circle’s Clifford Chance (30), Allen & Overy (28), and Linklaters (24). With 29 Tier 1 rankings, regional giant Rajah & Tann lead the charge for home-grown Asian firms; China’s Zhong Lun Law Firm obtains 20 rankings; Singapore’s Allen & Gledhill takes home 19; and Sydney’s Allens rounds off the top ten with 19 top tier rankings.

“The highest concentration of ranked firms is in China with 147 recommended”

Baker McKenzie continues its domination of our Asia Pacific rankings with a total of 144 Leading Individual rankings. With around half that number each come Herbert Smith Freehills (77), King & Wood Mallesons (73), and Australia’s MinterEllison (70). Allen & Overy and Clifford Chance are recognised with 54 and 53 leading lawyer recommendations, followed by Rajah & Tann (48), and multinationals Ashurst (46), DLA Piper (45), and Norton Rose Fulbright (42).

However, when it comes to our Next Generation Partners rankings, we have a new champion in town. King & Wood Mallesons lead the way with 46 new and up-and-coming partners of note, followed by Baker McKenzie (28), Allen & Overy (23), Clifford Chance (21), Herbert Smith Freehills (20), and Linklaters (19). Also of note are Ashurst (17), Japanese ‘Big Four’Mori Hamada & Matsumoto (17), DLA Piper (16), and, finally, South Korea’s Lee & Ko (16).

Baker McKenzie again returns to the fore with 40 Rising Star rankings, recognising the best associates across Asia Pacific. Herbert Smith Freehills (26), King & Wood Mallesons (26), Clifford Chance (22), Ashurst (21), Norton Rose Fulbright (20), DLA Piper (19), Allen & Overy (16), MinterEllison (13), and Linklaters (11) complete the now familiar list of best performing law firms.

Raising the Bar in 2021

So, that’s the 2020 rankings in a nutshell, with Baker McKenzie sitting triumphantly atop a pile of shiny rankings. But what about 2021? Well, guidelines for the next round of research have now been published online here. These guidelines include a number of new practice areas including Native Title in Australia, White-Collar Crime in Singapore, Private Client in India, and Fintech in Japan, among others.

Of particular note, the 2021 guide will, for the first time, recognise members of the Australia and Hong Kong Bars. In addition to inviting those chambers to submit directly for our next research cycle, we will also be asking law firms present across Asia Pacific to provide, in their own submissions, feedback on Australia-, Hong Kong-, and UK-based barristers. Information provided in your submissions will be kept strictly confidential.

If you have any queries relating to the new guidelines or upcoming research cycle, then please get in touch. Otherwise, the best of luck for 2021!

Posted on

The Legal 500 UK Awards 2020

More than 300 leading names from private practice, The Bar and the in-house legal community gathered together last month to celebrate the UK Legal 500 awards.

The awards – which have been running since 2015 – reward the best individuals and teams across all three areas of the profession, with winners chosen as part of the extensive UK research process.

As part of the evening – which was held at 8 Northumberland Avenue, Westminster – we awarded four outstanding achievement prizes to members of the Bar: John White of Henderson Chambers; Baroness Helena Kennedy QC of Doughty Street Chambers; Dr Courtenay Griffiths QC of 25 Bedford Row; and Barbara Dohmann QC of Blackstone Chambers.

Other winners attending on the night from across the country included Brodies, Goodwin, Mishcon de Reya, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Clifford Chance, as well as sets such as Wilberforce Chambers, 4 Paper Buildings and Essex Court Chambers.

The evening was sponsored by Eversheds Sutherland, Morae Global, Alvarez and Marsal, Cantab and Phillips.

Congratulations to all of our winners!

Full details of all of the winners can be found on our website here.

Posted on

The self-examination needed to take silk

There is a sort of miracle about most careers at the Bar. The fact that every year, cadres of people choose to cast free of the security of a salary, a defined career, paid leave, or the support of an institution, to pursue a career at the Bar, is remarkable enough. All the more so if you appreciate the currents they have to navigate to succeed, from the caprice of the market, to the political changes that may curtail whole fields of practice, and the politics of chambers. Add to that constant competition, and a very high rate of attrition and the choice seems more puzzling. And yet people do make that choice, year in, year out, to the abiding benefit of the law, the legal system, and those they represent.

Notwithstanding all of that, on 16 March 2020, 114 barristers will prepare to embrace a whole new set of imponderables as they walk, in robe, stocking and wig, to Westminster Hall, to receive their red leather-bound letter of appointment as Queen’s Counsel. This year I will be one of them, a Pagri instead of a wig, and I have been asked to answer some questions about the process, including for those who might be considering applying.

What is the process of application like?

It is without doubt, demanding. It requires a demonstration of excellence in a series of criteria, in a 52-page application form, with 36 referees (12 judicial, 12 client, and 12 practitioner, which usually means opponent), and a competency-based interview for those who pass the initial sift. However, that detail and complexity is both necessary and useful. It is a part of the process of self-examination as to whether you are ready, and as to whether this is what you want to do.

“Any minority candidate will have faced a series of challenges and obstacles, both internal and external, to get to the point of considering applying”

Don’t be deterred by that, of all things. Allow yourself plenty of time, read and take on board the extensive (and very helpful) QCA guidance, speak to those who have been through it, and avail yourself of the help that is available. The Bar Council operates an excellent mentoring scheme for those thinking of applying. Do that and you will know, or have a good sense, as to whether you are ready; the readiness is all. And if you are, you will manage the process.

What would you say to other Black and Ethnic Minority applicants?

I don’t pretend to speak for whole communities. In my experience ethnicity was not relevant to application process itself at all, and the QCA are working hard to reach out to potential candidates to make the process clear and accessible. Potential applicants’background, is, for many, more likely to have been relevant to the multiple tipping points that led you to the point of applying or not.

Any minority candidate will have faced a series of challenges and obstacles, both internal and external, to get to the point of considering applying. Others will at times have sought to define you by your distinct characteristic, or to categorise you, and the things you have achieved, by that quality. Don’t let them. But, equally, don’t let anyone else make you self-censor, or shy away from embracing your background and being proud of it.

My first direct experience of the Bar was a mini-pupillage, on which my supervisor said, ‘Because you are different, people will remember you. What they ascribe to that memory is down to you.’He was right, and I am grateful for that advice, and when the new silks are introduced to the judges on the day of the ceremony, I will remember it when I bow before him in the Court of Appeal on 16 March.

Are there improvements you would suggest to the process?

The process is accompanied by very significant expense which can be a disincentive. It is, without doubt an expensive process to run and maintain, rigorous as it is, and there are concessionary rates (half) for those who earn under £60,000 a year. However, the QCA has indicated that fees are likely to rise, and those fees are not the only (or even major) part of the unavoidable expense of applying and succeeding.

So, the one change I would suggest if possible would be a mitigation of the fee cost. The law is an infrastructure as vital as roads and bridges and services. Anything that potentially deters potentially suitable candidates, those who aspire to embrace the difficult questions and issues that the law poses, merits reduction where possible, especially in comparison to other professions where there are not equivalent costs to advancement.

Would you encourage others to apply?

Without hesitation. If you are ready, and you have accrued cases of the required complexity and substance, it merits the all of the effort. Simply engaging with the detailed competencies makes you a better lawyer. Further, the process takes you out of your silo as a practitioner and encourages engagement with your profession, which is continuously rewarding.

Application is a flag that you want to lead, with all the service that entails, in thought, in practice, and in the furtherance of the law. Whilst I will not pretend being appointed is not exciting and terrifying in about equal measure, I found the process was underpinned by a sense of warmth, encouragement, and support from across the profession, judiciary, and law that will remain with me for the rest of my career.

Posted on

Fighting for the next generation of indigenous talent

FF: Tell me a little about what it was like for you growing up in Far North Queensland, and what it was that made you want to be a lawyer?

I grew up in a place called Gordonvale and there are parts of when I think about growing up in Far North Queensland that can be confronting. There was a lot of domestic violence in my family perpetrated by my father against my mother. We actually had to move away from where my mum’s family lived and go quite far away – it just made it easier for us.

I remember the first day my younger sister and I got to our new school; I was in Grade 3 and my sister – who has lighter skin and lighter hair than me – was in Grade 1. When I got into my classroom, they put all the Aboriginal kids in the corner and said ‘You’re the Aboriginal kids, so you sit over there and play.’And I thought it was really weird. When I asked my sister if the same had happened to her, she told me it hadn’t. So I do have very early memories of being ‘put in the corner’ for being different.

When we finally moved back into town (into Cairns city), I went to Trinity Bay State High School. And I didn’t really have much interest in studying in Grade 12. I remember there being so much pressure to do really well and to make really big decisions. You’re expected to pick universities and pick courses, and I didn’t really know what I wanted to do. So I just gave up a little, and decided I wasn’t going to make those decisions then. I’d talked previously about doing law and going to university, but just the thought of doing that straight after school … if I’d have been pushed into doing it then, I probably never would have!

At the same time, my mum was working, studying nursing (she was the first in our family to go to university), and going on her practical training days at the hospital, but also going through a break-up with my step-dad. I was 17/18 years old, and I had a little sister and a little brother. Mum asked if I could be available to pick them up from school and make the dinners, and so that’s what I did. About a year into doing that, James Cook University called me and asked if I’d like to study law. When I’d finished school, I had put in a preference for law (I did really well at Legal Studies at school, and I thought it looked interesting), but never followed up on any of their letters afterwards! I was told I could do a bridging Arts degree, and transfer to do law later. So, I decided to do that.

When I went back to law at university, it was definitely something I was good at, but I felt I hadn’t found any direction with it. I didn’t even like law that much! But then I met some really incredible people in my last year at university – I suddenly had these people who were showing me ‘this is how you can use your degree’- and they helped me figure out my ‘why’.

FF: Since you graduated, your career has been varied, from private practice to the DPP and Coroner’s Office, to now practising as a barrister. What has prompted those various changes? What were your motivations?

While I was at university, and before I went into private practice, I worked as a secretary for a criminal defence firm. Cairns is really small, and the job opportunities are slim. From there I got poached to go into property law, and I took that opportunity, because even though I had no desire to go into property law, it was a job. I always kept my eyes open, though, because I always found criminal law really interesting. And then the role with the Director of Public Prosecutions came up. It’s very hard to get in to the DPP. And when you do first get into it, you’re only on a three-month contract each time. There’s no job security. At the same time, I’d been offered another job doing commercial work in a law firm, which would have been permanent. But I took the gamble with the three-month contract, with no assurance I was going to go further than that. I remember thinking ‘there’s never going to be another time in my life when I can do this’- where I was young, and didn’t have any debt, so I could take that risk. The one thing I really enjoyed at the DPP was the court work. You are in court nearly every day, and it was such great experience. That’s when I realised that I loved going to court, and that I wanted to focus on developing my advocacy skills.

From the DPP, I then moved to the Coroner’s Office, and I couldn’t believe I got that job! Australia is so large, geographically; the Northern Coroner covers an area the size of a few European countries put together. And each Coroner has only one Counsel Assisting, so you have to wait for people to either retire or move on for that opportunity to come up. I applied for it, not thinking I would get it, but I really needed a change at the time. And, lo and behold! I got the job! And it was so interesting. You can’t really even explain it to people.

I went to watch a live autopsy, and got to learn so much about the medico-legal part of the practice. You’re always talking to the medical profession and various other stakeholders, including the police. On my first week in the job, three sky-divers fell out of the sky in an accident, and a granny who went missing north of Cairns was suspected to have been taken by a crocodile. And that was just in my first week. Only in Australia!

“When I went back to study law at university, it was definitely something I was good at, but I felt I hadn’t found any direction with it. I didn’t even like law that much!”

You never knew what you were going to walk into. Until I logged into my computer in the morning, I had no idea what my day was going to look like. It was a very cool job, and a huge privilege. You’re left to investigate and care for families who have just had the worst day of their lives, because when it comes to the coroner’s office, it’s either a violent or non-natural death. You have a big responsibility, and a lot of people to service because of how big the area is. You’re looking after people who can’t speak for themselves – they’ve passed on – but their families are still here and you want to give them answers and hopefully prevent further deaths like that happening again.

FF: And you’re now practising as a barrister across two chambers, in Cairns and Brisbane.

That’s right. When I was at the DPP, I had a good friend – a Papua New Guinean woman – who was probably the first person I related to in terms of being from a minority group. Not only am I rare being Aboriginal, I’m even rarer being an Aboriginal woman in this industry.

Anyway, she was a Crown Prosecutor and found out about this trust fund. The very first Aboriginal barrister, called Lloyd McDermott, who later used his traditional name Mullenjaiwakka, created a trust fund for Aboriginal solicitors who wanted to become barristers. You had to write a story about yourself and convince them why they should pay for you to do the course – because it’s expensive. My friend actually locked me in her room one day and said ‘You are going to finish this application and you are going to send it.’So I did it.

And I got approved for the funding. I remember they called me and said ‘We’ve all read your story and were very moved by it, and we would love to sponsor you through this process.’So that was while I was at the DPP. And I knew I had a lot of study ahead of me, because you do three 90-minute exams on three different areas in one day, and you have to pass them all to get on the course. You also have to move to Brisbane for six weeks to complete it. The whole process for me took a couple of years, but I got there.

FF: Can you tell me about particular obstacles you have faced as an Indigenous woman?

It’s always in the back of your mind that you’re different. It was that feeling when I went to the new school in Grade 3 and was immediately put with the other Indigenous kids. That feeling is continual; it will never stop. And that’s fine. I’ve got a thick skin and I’ve got people who I talk to for support about that.

In Grade 8, I did very well academically, and was offered a scholarship to attend Trinity Anglican School, which is one of the most expensive schools in Cairns. So, if you weren’t rich, you had to have extremely good grades. I was offered a partial scholarship, which meant they paid for my school fees, but they didn’t pay for say, a laptop (which was necessary, but not standard then the way it is now). I reconciled to tell my Mum I wanted to go to the other available school, because I wouldn’t need a laptop, and then I wouldn’t have to worry about Mum stressing all the time about keeping up with Joneses. We couldn’t afford that, and it wasn’t something I wanted to put my family through. Even though I had the grades to go to Trinity Anglican… knowing that I didn’t have that structure around me, financially, that would have been a big burden on my Mum.

So, from a very young age, I had to be very vigilant about my actions, and their consequences, because I didn’t want to give my Mum one more worry. She had enough.

It was at university that I became more comfortable financially. I was given scholarships to help with the financial burdens, and we also had our own Indigenous school. This meant our printing was free and we had a fridge to keep out food in, because we couldn’t afford to buy out every day. We were really cared for and supported, not just financially but emotionally as well. And that was amazing. We had our own tutors, which made all the difference for me. I did my whole degree on a mini laptop, which I shared with my mum while she was also studying. We both completed our degrees on this one tiny laptop. We still joke today about how we managed to do it, and it’s probably why I have poor eyesight!

I think in terms of obstacles: if I didn’t have the Mullenjaiwakka Trust, I’d never have been able to do my barrister’s course. The course alone was AUD$6,000, plus the cost of moving to Brisbane for six weeks. You have to attend classes every single day. I saved up three years’worth of holidays just so I could take those six weeks off and get paid for it. Most of the others in my classes were not worrying about who was paying for their course or taking time off work. And many of them had the ‘in’to get work experience and to attend networking events, as they had friends or relatives in the industry. I didn’t know anyone!

A real turning point for me was when I met my junior mentor – Joshua Creamer – while I was doing my Bar course. He taught one of the classes, and I introduced myself just to say thank you for being part of the process that got me there. He said ‘When are you coming to the Bar?’and I replied, ‘Oh, I’m not for a while!’Because at the time, I was planning to go back to the Coroner’s Office to continue that job for a while. Going out on your own at the private Bar costs a fortune. You don’t get paid until you get clients, and it was all a big leap for me. Joshua said ‘No, you have to come now. The time is now.’But I still wasn’t sure. Later on, we caught up again for lunch and he said ‘I want you to come to the Bar, I want you to know that I’ll support you; I’ll pay out of my own money if it means you’ll come.’He then introduced me to people and of course those introductions led to other introductions. He has had me involved in class action work; he offered me door tenancy at his Chambers in Brisbane.

At the time, I found it very hard to trust people, because I’d never been given an opportunity like this before. I felt that opportunities like this were given to other people, not me. You never know if people are going to be true to their word; people can be very excitable in the moment. But I did trust Joshua.

I went home and quit my job, which was the scariest day of my life, especially having to say to my boss ‘I said I wouldn’t go to the Bar, but now I’m going to’. I also had to talk to my partner about it; I’m sure he was hoping I would come home from the course and things would settle down a bit… but really, he should have known better!

FF: What now constitutes the majority of you work?

At the moment, I’m doing a lot of criminal defence work, but I also do anti-discrimination, domestic violence, and class actions. I really enjoy representing Indigenous juveniles. That’s when I get to intercept at an early stage and say ‘I know that you feel like your life sucks, but I have felt the same.’I can show them my robes and my wig, and I can say ‘This is what you could be. I’ve been there, and I know how you feel. You don’t have to live like this.’I do really love that work. I really want there to be more Indigenous faces in the law, and I really try to encourage my young clients to stay in school, to get a good education, and, hopefully, one day join the industry.

FF: What do you believe needs to be done to improve Indigenous representation in the industry?

For anyone who wants to work with us, or advance us, they really just need to have an open mind. They need to realise that what they think they know about us is probably completely wrong. It’s willingness to learn and provide safe spaces for us. Because we will teach you – we just need to know that you’re going to use that information appropriately and safely to keep the conversation going. Right now, there are only two Indigenous women at the private Bar – Avelina Tarrago and me – and we know the women who are out there looking to us for that success story. The more of us are out there, the less pressure there is on Avelina and me… and it will eventually come! But really, it has to start with open-mindedness and a willingness to learn. And that’s not something you learn from books; it’s such a new phenomenon to have Aboriginal women wearing robes and wigs. It has to come directly from us.

There are a lot of people who say ‘she won’t make it’- an instinctual believe that because we’re women and because we’re Aboriginal, we won’t be successful. They’re not true believers. We feel that, we know exactly who thinks that. You can’t hide that type of energy when you’re in a room with someone. But that’s in Australia and throughout the world – there are people who understand, and there are people who could understand; they’re informed enough, but they choose not to, out

of fear or something else, I’m not sure. There are definitely people who would prefer us to quieten down and slowly leave the profession, but it turns out we don’t want to. We’re not going to go away.

Getting connected with universities and establishing relationships with students would also be beneficial. When I was growing up, I did not know one lawyer, and it would have been an incredible help if I’d had some industry connections.

FF: What would be your advice to aspiring Indigenous lawyers?

Study more! Keep chipping away. It’s not easy, but it’s also not as hard as you think. Be an open book. If I’m struggling… I was always taught to express that. When you look around a room and people have just got their heads down, pretending like everything is coming so easily, you can look to yourself and think ‘Why do I have to try so hard? Is it because I’m not good enough?’, and it’s absolutely not that. You’re just being honest with yourself. And so be honest with yourself, and ask for help when you need it. Never change you who are, and never change who you are to make other people like you or feel comfortable. Keep thinking about what your ancestors have done for you to even be in a position to study law, the fight that they have gone through. And then think about the fight you’re going through, and know that it will make it easier for the next generation.